Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes: >> /** >> * Release a string buffer and the memory it used. You should not use the >> - * string buffer after using this function, unless you initialize it again. >> + * string buffer after using this function. >> */ >> extern void strbuf_release(struct strbuf *); > > I think it's actually OK to use the string buffer after this function. > It's just an empty string. > > Perhaps we should be more explicit: this releases any resources and > resets to a pristine, empty state. I suspect strbuf_detach() probably > should make the same claim. > > Earlier you mentioned: > >> It is still not advisable to call strbuf_release until done using a >> strbuf because it is wasteful, so keep that part of the advice. > > Is this what you meant? If so, I think we should probably be more > explicit in giving people a hint to use strbuf_reset() for efficiency. Yes, "should not use" above is simply misleading. Either drop it altogether, or say something like If you find yourself reusing the same strbuf in a loop and calling strbuf_release() each iteration, you may want to consider if it makes more sense to use strbuf_reset() instead in each iteration and calling strbuf_release() at the end. perhaps.
